Balch’s Consumer Finance Compass: How Standing Can Make or Break Certification for Class Action Lawsuits in Debt Collection
Navigating Civil Standing Requirements for Defense Success — RICO Report Podcast
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Universal Injunctions, Associational Standing, and Forum Shopping - Their Effects on Legal Challenges to Regulations
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Eleventh Circuit Grants en banc Review to Resolve Controversial TCPA Standing Ruling
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 313: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
SCOTUS Watch: The ACA and Key Health Law Areas Justice Barrett Could Impact - Diagnosing Health Care Podcast
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 110: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
Let's Talk Child Custody
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Supreme Court’s Rulings On Same-Sex Marriage Spark Many Questions On Employee Benefits
DynCorp's 'Strategic' Defense In Drug Crop Spraying Suit
Bill on Bankruptcy: MF Global Creditors Undeterred by Low Value
Same-Sex Marriage Cases in 90 Seconds
Today, on the last day of the 2024-2025 term, the Supreme Court of the United States issued five decisions: Trump v. CASA, Inc., No. 24A884: This case addresses whether district courts had the authority to issue...more
The U.S. Supreme Court decision yesterday that likely will get the most attention is Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, in which a 6–3 Court that lined up according to the conservative vs. liberal stereotype, held...more
On June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States issued six decisions: Diamond Alternative Energy, LLC v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 24-7: This case addresses fuel producers’ Article III standing to...more
On January 30, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a landmark opinion in Reese v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), holding that 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(b)(1) and (c)(1), which...more
On Thursday, June 13, the Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions: FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, No. 23-235: This case involves an attempt to rescind the Food and Drug Administration’s...more
The FTC, and antitrust enforcement in general, are having their moment. For example, in early January the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in AMG Capital Management v. Federal Trade Commission, a case questioning the FTC’s...more
Interpreting Bristol-Myers : Are Unnamed Members of Nationwide Class Actions ‘Parties’? If So, When? In 2017, the Supreme Court decided Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California (BMS), holding that a...more
On June 29, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided June Medical Services L.L.C. et al. v. Russo, Interim Secretary, Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals, holding that abortion providers had standing to assert the...more
This morning, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in the following cases: California v. Texas, No. 19-840; Texas v. California, No. 19-1019: A petition for a writ of certiorari and conditional...more
In 1879, Connecticut passed a law barring the use of “any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception”; the penalty was“not less than fifty dollars” or between 60 days and one year in...more
We are pleased to share BakerHostetler’s 2016 Class Action Year-End Review, which offers a summary of key developments in class action litigation during the past year. Class action litigation moved to the forefront of the...more
In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to hand down several decisions addressing overbroad or “no-injury” class actions, and a number of important issues are percolating in the lower courts as well. Below are some issues...more
Two controversial cases involving same-sex marriage were decided on June 26, 2013 by the United States Supreme Court. ...more
On June 26, 2013, the United States Supreme Court issued its decisions in Windsor v. United States and Hollingsworth, et. al. v. Perry et. al., thus ending a four year "fast-track" judicial expedition of the validity of the...more
On June 26, 2013, the US Supreme Court (the “Supreme Court”) struck down Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) as unconstitutional in the case of United States v. Windsor (“Windsor”). In a related case, the...more
On June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decisions in two same-sex marriage cases. In Hollingsworth v. Perry, No. 12-144, the Court ruled that the proponents of a popular voter initiative that reversed...more
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 vote that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional. The decision in United States v. Windsor means that same-sex couples who are married under state law...more
Windsor v. United States - Issue: Can the federal government define marriage? Holding: No. Loser: The federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which was passed in 1996 and signed by President Clinton, was...more
As the 2012 term of the U. S. Supreme Court comes to a close, the Justices left the most politically and emotionally charged decisions for last. On June 26, 2013, the Court handed down its decision striking down the federal...more